Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk/Archives/2012 June 21

Help desk
< June 20	<< May | June | Jul >>	June 22 >

Welcome to the WikiProject Articles for creation Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

June 21

Asking why my article was declined

I am VERY much an amateur at creating Wikipedia pages. I submitted an article Wikipedia talk Articles for creation/Denny Morales. it was originally declined for lack of references but I have since added quite a few references. If you can help me "get it right" I would greatly appreciate it. Thank you. Bill Paddock Billppaddock (talk) 02:23, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Websites offering to sell a musician's work are not considered to establish that musician's notability, due to the obvious conflict of interest there. That was your first reference. The rest are from allmusic, which as a directory of essentially everything music, also does not establish notability. It may be reliable for stating that Morales is in the credits, or for when an item was released, but it does not establish that Morales is considered notable in the field. What we need are sources that actually discuss Morales and his work, rather than simply listing it, and are independent (i.e. are not also selling his work). Also, please properly format your external links (see Help:Footnotes and Help:Links). It's not required for a successful submission, but it makes the review easier. Someguy1221 (talk) 02:34, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

How do I submit a completed article?

My article has been moved to "talk" but I don't know how to tag it for review -- or where to put the tag, or anything else. Please let me know and I will move forward. I appreciate your guidance -- I imagine I will get better at this as I go along. Wikipedia talk: Articles for creation/American Sports Builders Association Mhsprecher (talk) 02:34, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Put the following bolded text at the top of a submission to submit (or resubmit): {{subst:AFC submission/submit}} Someguy1221 (talk) 02:38, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Issue with newly created page

Dear Sir/Madam, I've created a page here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longbai_Xincun_Station) recently and got approved. However, the chinese version of this page linked to another station which is on the same metro line. As a native chinese speaker I would like to edit that page so that both the english and chinese version means the same station, but would the current linked page, which stands for another metro station, be affected? If it would, how should I edit the page?

Thanks. Kind Regards Michael Zhang Eamond (talk) 09:40, 21 June 2012 (UTC) (username: eamond) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eamond (talk • contribs) 08:27, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

I don't speak Chinese and thus have to guess a little, but if I understand you correctly, the problem is that the link from Longbai Xincun Station to the Chinese Wikipedia pointed to a different station, namely Hangzhong Road Station. That link was created by the line [[zh:航中路站]], the English article's very last line. I have changed that link so that it points to what I believe is the correct Chinese article, zh:龙柏新村站. Please check that I didn't screw up. Huon (talk) 08:48, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Huon, your understanding is absolutely correct. Thank you for the help. Cheers, Michael Eamond (talk) 09:40, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Cove (band)

I have entered an article for creation 'Cove (band)' which has been delcined twice on the grounds of unverifiable information despite there being lots of refernces. Why is it being declined when there are pages (such as Joeyfat) which have almost no references? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Covesounds (talk • contribs) 15:47, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

First of all, there were fragments of an earlier version of your draft, including a second {{reflist}} template, which effectively hid all your references. I have fixed that; possibly the reviewer simply did not see the references you have.

Secondly, the references leave much to be desired. I checked quite a few, and none of them even wrote a sentence about Cove. The most I found were track listings. That's not the significant coverage required to establish the band's notability. (Facebook and MySpace may provide more coverage, but those are primary sources and cannot establish notability.) I don't see which criterion of WP:MUSIC they are supposed to satisfy, either.

Thirdly, other articles with insufficient sources exist, but that's no reason to create more. Huon (talk) 17:47, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Review of User:Genepez/sandbox

I submitted for review the wrong version of the article 'Lumiere & Son Theatre Company': a version that omits all the footnoted references. How can I take this version off the Review waiting list and replace it with the current referenced version? Genepez (talk) 17:22, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

The easiest way would be to simply edit this version and add the references. I have removed the submission template for now; please re-submit it when you're finished adding the references. Huon (talk) 17:47, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Review of User:Acharya vikas kaushik ji/Acharya VIKAS KAUSHIK JI

Dear Helper, im UNABLE to upload ACHARYA VIKAS KAUSHIK JI PHOTO TO MY ARTICLE CAN U PL DO IT FOR ME THX.i am praying to God that my article would feature on WIKIPIDEA soon with your kind assistance. jai shri krishna! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acharya vikas kaushik ji (talk • contribs) 17:52, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

You can upload images via Special:Upload, but your account must be autoconfirmed - it must be at least four days old, with at least ten edits. If the image comes with a free license such as the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License or one compatible to it, you can also upload it to the Wikimedia Commons via their Upload Wizard. If it isn't free, you probably should not upload it at all because one of the criteria for fair use is that no free equivalent is available or likely to become available, and for photos of living persons we usually assume that a free one could become available if it isn't already.

Two other points: Firstly, you have not addressed the issues with the references I pointed out (I can't read Hindi, but I expect something called "readerblogs" is a blog by a newspaper reader, not content published by the newspaper itself, and thus not a reliable source). You should concentrate on that, not on bells and whistles such as images. Secondly, Excirial told you that you should not publish medical histories with identifying information and email addresses on Wikipedia unless sourced to a reliable published source - and probably not even then unless the person whose details you publish is the article's subject. Excirial even deleted Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/ACHARYA VIKAS KAUSHIK JI for that reason, but you immediately re-created the page in your userspace, including the information you were told not to publish. Such conduct is more likely to see you blocked than to see your article published. Huon (talk) 18:26, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/iDonate

Hi, I created a draft of a new article - Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/iDonate I submitted and it was quickly reviewed. I then did several updates as per recommendations and resubmitted. I am not sure if I resubmitted properly as the first feedback still shows. Please let me know if it is properly resubmitted. Poshpaddy (talk) 18:31, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it's properly resubmitted. The first feedback just serves as a historical record. As long as there's a "Review waiting" message and the article is categorized among the Pending AfC submissions, everything is OK. But I saw that many of the references appear to be primary sources, such as the platform's own website, while many others don't mention iDonate at all. That's not the significant coverage in reliable secondary sources necessary to establish notability. Huon (talk) 18:41, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Healthy Back Store

So - I understand that "notable" references are needed in order to make this article worth including on Wikipedia. I'm wondering why a Washington Post article is not notable? I'm also wondering how it is a business like Relax the Back - makes it into Wikipedia and they have ZERO references? What is it about this company that makes it worth listing but not Healthy Back Store? I'd appreciate more direction and information on how to make this work. Thank you.

98.148.100.118 (talk) 18:47, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

The Washington Post is certainly a reliable source, but a single piece of local news is not quite the "significant coverage" required to establish a topic's notability. For comparison, a Google News search for Relax the Back shows articles in the San Francisco Chronicle, Deseret News, the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, and the Austin American-Statesman - all on the first page. While that article indeed does not cite sources, many reliable sources exist. A comparable search for the Healthy Back Store produced mostly press releases, which are not reliable. Anyway, the existence of other insufficiently sourced articles is not a reason to create more.

My suggestion would be to find more news pieces, preferably not just local news. In particular, the lead of the draft is still only supported by primary sources. Huon (talk) 19:13, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

My article is sitting uncommented on since May 6th

Hi ,

I'm probably not communicating correctly with my reviewer but I completed all the tasks he asked me to perform to ensure my article was ready for publishing but I have heard nothing since early May.

Can you please help? Thanks Guillermo

My article is sitting uncommented on since May 6th

Hi ,

I'm probably not communicating correctly with my reviewer but I completed all the tasks he asked me to perform to ensure my article was ready for publishing but I have heard nothing since early May.

Can you please help? Thanks Guillermo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gsuescum (talk • contribs) 21:02, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Guillermo, I am unable to help you at the moment since you never referenced what your article is or provided a link. However, from looking at your user talk page, I have gathered that the page you wish to submit is Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Somebody's Hero - The Movie. If this is correct, then all you need to do is click the link "click here" in the review box at the top (next to the text "When the submission is ready to be re-submitted") and then click submit on that screen so that your article will be re-submitted for review.

Hope that helps! Patrick Bradshaw (talk) 21:34, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

P.S. If the article I posted is not your article, ignore everything that follows! :) I gave your article a quick read-through after I dealt with your question, and I do not think that the article is ready for review yet. First, the reviewer's comment was never dealt with and there are still no inline citations in your article. Because of this, it is hard to determine what of your content is verifiable and whether any of it is more speculation. And secondly, it seems that a majority of your references come from the website for the movie itself. Please try to refrain from primary sources (see reliable sources) and instead use reliable secondary sources so that the reviewers can pass this article easily and we can ensure that the content contained is properly neutral and not biased. As I read through your article, I do see that it is not biased and thus your primary sources may be okay in this instance. I think you have a very good start to your article and as long as you put inline citations into your article it should pass review (depending on how the reviewer sees the primary sources - it's worth a try imho!). Good luck! Patrick Bradshaw (talk) 21:44, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Review of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/East Valley

My submission (East Valley) was recently rejected by Wikipedia. The reason cited was that: "the page already exists under 'East Valley (Phoenix Metropolitan area)'..." However, upon further review of that page, there is merely four sentences to that page, while mine nears 4,000 words of cited work - a project compiled by an array of published writers from the (East Valley) area. Besides, there is no article with ONLY the name EAST VALLEY. The purpose of this article is to display the East Valley as a separate entity from the greater Phoenix Metropolitan area. That purpose would cease to exist if I simply adding my content to the page that has Phoenix in the title. I am seeking my page to be created separately - with the name "East Valley."

I strongly urge the reviewers of Wikipedia to re-consider. The content, in both quality and quantity, of my article-for-creation is vastly superior to that of "East Valley (Phoenix Metropolitan area)." Or, if I am to add my well-written content to that page, there must be a way of changing the title of that page to ONLY reading: EAST VALLEY. Is there a way to make this work?

Jfornara (talk) 23:46, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Firstly, there is an article named East Valley; it's a disambiguation page for the various areas named "East Valley". Secondly, creating a separate article about the same subject to express a different point of view is known as a "POV fork", it's inconsistent with Wikipedia's policies. Our purpose should be to write an encyclopedia, not to promote some local area. Thirdly, quite a few of your references are primary sources. Especially when discussing the companies and institutions you often rely solely on such sources, but Wikipedia content should be based on secondary sources. On the other hand, claims such as the one about Intel being the company with the most profound impact are unsourced, and even worse, the sources given sometimes do not support the claims they are cited for - Intel's 10,300 employees are one example. Also, quite a few of the sources do not mention the East Valley at all - the Intel article from The Arizona Republic, for example, repeatedly mentions the Greater Phoenix Economic Council, but a "southeast Valley city" is the closest they come to mentioning the East Valley. That seems to flat-out contradict the point you want to make. The Skysong Center, Aerospace & Defense Research Collaboratory and Arizona State University websites do not even provide such roundabout references. Finally, the draft's tone at times is decidedly unencyclopedic. For example, encyclopedia articles usually do not ask questions. Also, phrases such as "another story of blazing growth" are hardly appropriate except as an attributed quote from a reliable source. We're not writing a land developer's commercial.

In summary, I don't think a second article on the East Valley is warranted; I would instead suggest you merge those parts of your draft that are both relevant to the East Valley and supported by reliable secondary sources into the East Valley (Phoenix metropolitan area) article. Huon (talk) 01:07, 22 June 2012 (UTC)